To you, what's the bottom of the "elite" colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

You obviously don't. But in fact many others do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

Source? This is bs. If you just want to live in NYC, then you apply to a school you actually have a chance of getting into. Like Fordham or NYU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

You obviously don't. But in fact many others do.

Most people definitely do not place Columbia on that tier. If there is any school that approaches HYPSM status is Caltech. Hence the occasional use of HYPSMC instead of HYPSM (C meaning Caltech, never Columbia). Columbia is just not on that tier. Look at the rankings, look at the cross admit splits, look at the yield rate, look at endowment, the fact that it has ED and not SCEA etc etc etc.

You might want it to be on par with HYPSM, but it sure isn't. It is a top 10 school, just not part of the ultra elite club that is HYPSM. Its peers are other lower top 10 schools like Caltech, UPenn, Chicago.

[Anonymous]

We're really splitting hairs here. USNWR says it ranks 1,400 4-year colleges in the US. But some of you think "elite" means just the top 3-5 schools, which is way less than 1%. In fact, 1% would be the top 14. We could even boldly talk about the top 2%, which would be the top 28 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

You obviously don't. But in fact many others do.

Most people definitely do not place Columbia on that tier. If there is any school that approaches HYPSM status is Caltech. Hence the occasional use of HYPSMC instead of HYPSM (C meaning Caltech, never Columbia). Columbia is just not on that tier. Look at the rankings, look at the cross admit splits, look at the yield rate, look at endowment, the fact that it has ED and not SCEA etc etc etc.

You might want it to be on par with HYPSM, but it sure isn't. It is a top 10 school, just not part of the ultra elite club that is HYPSM. Its peers are other lower top 10 schools like Caltech, UPenn, Chicago.

You really have no clue. The C might be Chicago or Columbia but it's never CalTech.

[Anonymous]

In terms of the best minds and thinkers - the institutions that actually make significant contributions in the scientific and technology fields (as defined by new ideas, innovations and influence) the clear winners in terms of scholarly citations and clickstream data are HYPMS and UC Berkeley - no other schools come close - this group is truly elite and light years ahead.

[Anonymous]

(Oops - and Cal Tech too)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

You obviously don't. But in fact many others do.

Most people definitely do not place Columbia on that tier. If there is any school that approaches HYPSM status is Caltech. Hence the occasional use of HYPSMC instead of HYPSM (C meaning Caltech, never Columbia). Columbia is just not on that tier. Look at the rankings, look at the cross admit splits, look at the yield rate, look at endowment, the fact that it has ED and not SCEA etc etc etc.

You might want it to be on par with HYPSM, but it sure isn't. It is a top 10 school, just not part of the ultra elite club that is HYPSM. Its peers are other lower top 10 schools like Caltech, UPenn, Chicago.

You really have no clue. The C might be Chicago or Columbia but it's never CalTech.

I am afraid you need to do your research. The C is never ever Columbia or Chicago, it is always Caltech. But don't take my word for it:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=HYPSMC
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/HYPSMC
http://www.yourdictionary.com/hypsmc

[Anonymous]

There is Oxford, and places that are not Oxford.

[Anonymous]

^ Usually this kind of statement is reserved for Harvard, but I guess Oxford can also pull it off lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

You obviously don't. But in fact many others do.

Most people definitely do not place Columbia on that tier. If there is any school that approaches HYPSM status is Caltech. Hence the occasional use of HYPSMC instead of HYPSM (C meaning Caltech, never Columbia). Columbia is just not on that tier. Look at the rankings, look at the cross admit splits, look at the yield rate, look at endowment, the fact that it has ED and not SCEA etc etc etc.

You might want it to be on par with HYPSM, but it sure isn't. It is a top 10 school, just not part of the ultra elite club that is HYPSM. Its peers are other lower top 10 schools like Caltech, UPenn, Chicago.

You really have no clue. The C might be Chicago or Columbia but it's never CalTech.

I am afraid you need to do your research. The C is never ever Columbia or Chicago, it is always Caltech. But don't take my word for it:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=HYPSMC
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/HYPSMC
http://www.yourdictionary.com/hypsmc

And yet others think it is U Chicago or Columbia
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/dartmouth-college/57081-turning-down-hypsc-for-dartmouth.html

Why? Columbia beats CalTech on rankings, admit rates and yield, despite your bolder claims above: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/667577.page

That people like you get so involved with twisting facts shows how competitive and obsessive this whole ranking business is.

[Anonymous]

This whole discussion typifies the competitive nonsense around college rankings.
- "Elite" defined to be the top 3 of 1,400 colleges. Not the top 10 or top 20, but the top 3 which is less than 1%
- Posters insist on metrics that suit their purposes: acceptance rates vs USNWR or other rankings vs yield rates vs total number of applicants.
- Some posters don't hesitate to make up stuff about rankings and yield, like the Columbia basher above, when the facts were posted on DCUM just a few days ago.

You people need to get a grip.

[Anonymous]

The C IS generally considered Caltech, but HYPSMC refers to overall rankings, not just undergrad ones. Caltech often ranks in the top 5 in the world, hence its inclusion.

If you were to look at just undergrad components, yes, Columbia is better. Higher endowment, smaller classes, better graduation rates, marginally higher retention.. that's why Columbia ranks 5th and Caltech 10th. Columbia DOES have a higher yield than Caltech, both overall and if you look at just the RD kids alone. However, one is literally comparing apples to oranges here. A school with less than 1000 undergrads against one with 6000. One is a leading STEM school, the other is better known for the liberal arts thanks to the Core. The top STEM kids do go to Caltech (http://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=Caltech&with=Columbia+University+in+the+City+of+New+York), but that's not so surprising- Caltech takes only the best STEM kids, period.

Let's just admit that they're both elite and stop this petty nonsense about comparing them. I'd be thrilled to bits if my child matriculated to EITHER- even if they had their choice of going to HYPSM. There is not that big of a gap with these colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TRULY "elite" - let's be honest:

Princeton University (NJ)
Harvard University (MA)
Yale University (CT) (tie)
Columbia University (NY) (tie)
Stanford University (CA) (tie)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

That's it folks - those are the ONLY schools that are so elite they NEVER require explanation.

Of course Penn's Wharton School and Cornell's Hotel school are elite - but that's the point you have to specify the particular program. The other Top 25 schools are terrific, but there are NOT in the same class.

I liked how you snuck Columbia in there.

Hasn't Columbia been harder to get into than Yale or Princeton for the last several years?

Columbia has not been harder to get in than Yale or Princeton. Acceptance rate does not equal selectivity. Columbia gets many many extra applicants due to its NYC location, many of which are not qualified, they just apply to the only ivy in NYC.

Truth is no one really thinks of Columbia as on par with HYPSM.

You obviously don't. But in fact many others do.

Most people definitely do not place Columbia on that tier. If there is any school that approaches HYPSM status is Caltech. Hence the occasional use of HYPSMC instead of HYPSM (C meaning Caltech, never Columbia). Columbia is just not on that tier. Look at the rankings, look at the cross admit splits, look at the yield rate, look at endowment, the fact that it has ED and not SCEA etc etc etc.

You might want it to be on par with HYPSM, but it sure isn't. It is a top 10 school, just not part of the ultra elite club that is HYPSM. Its peers are other lower top 10 schools like Caltech, UPenn, Chicago.

You really have no clue. The C might be Chicago or Columbia but it's never CalTech.

I am afraid you need to do your research. The C is never ever Columbia or Chicago, it is always Caltech. But don't take my word for it:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=HYPSMC
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/HYPSMC
http://www.yourdictionary.com/hypsmc

And yet others think it is U Chicago or Columbia
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/dartmouth-college/57081-turning-down-hypsc-for-dartmouth.html

Why? Columbia beats CalTech on rankings, admit rates and yield, despite your bolder claims above: http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/667577.page

That people like you get so involved with twisting facts shows how competitive and obsessive this whole ranking business is.

You are twisting facts. You present the post of a clueless teenager when the acronym is pretty established to mean Caltech. Columbia does not beat Caltech in the rankings, Caltech yield and retention is low because it is so hard and many people are afraid of the rigor /are not able to finish. Caltech is tops in a specific field, STEM, and that is why it is sometimes included in the list with the most prestigious US schools, HYPSM. Columbia is just not on that level, it is a less prestigious version of HYP. If Columbia was on HYPSM level then it would have a yield rate similar to HYPSM, it would have SCEA, it would have an endowment similar to HYPSM, it would have historical prestige similar to HYPSM. But none of these things are true. That is why Columbia is lumped with the lower elite schools as opposed to HYPSM.

[Anonymous]

Duke is bottom of elite, after Ivys Chicago MIT Cal Tech.